Today’s WaPo

By Loudoun Insider

Quite a few stories of interest today for northern Virginia politics:

A surprisingly fair profile of Corey Stewart leads the Metro section.

The idotic proposal to have Republican Presidential Primary voters sign a pledge continues to get bad press. It looks like this was the brainchild of Charlie Judd, probably acting at the behest of Ken Cuccinelli. This is just so pig-headed and worthless to boot. Judd even admits that its only a piece of paper with no enforcement mechanism. So why do it in the first place? It’s just another impediment to voting and a sign that the GOP doesn’t trust anyone. Brilliant PR move guys.

The Loudoun schools operating budget has to go up at twice the rate of growth plus inflation according to Herr Hatrick. No big surprise there.


Comments

  • Macho Man says:

    You tout Firetti? Now I am laughing.
    RWN…you need check no further than the vpap files to see that Dale Polen Myer pushed these boys forward, and Dr. Cranium tried to dress them up for the public, and that Jack Shockey and Brian Roherty and friends were pulling their strings.
    THAT is the Citizens for PROFIT Rights agenda, and that is why, with the exception of Lori Waters, the majority of voters rejected your candidates outright. Continue to let them orchestrate the actions of the LCRC, and you’ll lose again in the near future. Cleanse the party of the CPR and Myers, who backed Ryan and Simpson from within the safety of your beloved LCRC, and you’ve got a real chance at connecting with those voters. Sit on your duff, do nothing to address it, and prepare to FOLD UP the tent. Standing back giving me and others so much credit for altering the vote county-wide would probably feed our egos, but it ain’t why you lost. The develop-every-acre-of-Loudoun choir did that for you. You just forgot to listen to the county voters. And you should hit your knees and thank the big guy for not sending a better candidate than West to dispatch your looney. Or else, you’d be crying over that, too.
    As it is, he’s been nuetralized from doing further harm in every 8-1 vote from here till 2011. Enjoy that. I certainly will.
    But here’s my soft side. Help me toss out(or just diminish to normal coexistant stature) the Developer/CPR ideologues, and I’m committed to rebuilding the party and it’s reputation in front of the voters. If you don’t convince them, you don’t get back in office. But if we work on the reputation (minus the CPR in control)we might just convince them that we’re okay again.
    Like Bush explained so well to the UN before we busted our move as a nation…
    The choice is up to people like you…or it’ll be up to people like us.

  • Jose Kinusee says:

    Nut Case,

    You were/are a hinderance (refer to the definition of your type of GOP in #41). Your ego may be preventing you from noticing it, but buddy, you’re a hinderance.

    RR would be happy to see the recently evolved, wingnut element of the GOP cleansed from the party, that Nutson, would make him proud.

  • Sanity says:

    As a Loudoun County Democrat, I can’t help but love the exclusionary Republican pledge. Just keep pushing the reasonable people out, and I’ll get happier and happier.

    I think the real problem is that the Republican Party has no leader. It’s officially GWB, but even the Republicans think he’s a sad excuse of a _______ (fill in the blank: “President”, “Leader”, “Role Model”, “Statesman”, “Selecter of Cronies”…)

    Someone needs to step up and say “We’re so confident we don’t need a pledge. If we’re going on a retreat, we’re calling it a retreat. No need to “gild the Lily” by calling it an ‘advance’.”

    Whatever else Ronald Reagan was, he was the type to utter those kinds of words.

    RWN: At some point, you would think you would actually be able to see through the rose-colored haze. Your foolishness is almost beyond belief.

    Most people want to be governed well. What your erstwhile brethren are telling you is that arrogant, nasty, developer-pocket, Republicans do make poorer supervisors than reasonable, middle-of-the-road Democrats. This County belongs to all of us, and we don’t want crazy supervisors to ruin it regardless of what party affiliation they have.

    What you aren’t listening to is this “screaming” from most of the other posters “If the Republicans can find even semi-reasonable candidates, they will have my vote.”

    You won’t hear that from me, though. What you will hear is “I’ll vote for the Democrat if he/she is at least semi-reasonable. Otherwise, if the Republican is at least semi-reasonable I’ll vote for him/her. If neither is at least semir-reasonable, I’m staying home.”

    FIND REASONABLE CANDIDATES, NOT FELLOW NUT-CASES! (Hello! Any path through the rose-colored haze? Hello!)

  • Dorothy says:

    To #27–
    You wrote that “There is simply no evidence that statistically significant numbers of non-Rs invade the nominating process to pick weak candidates.”
    It actually happened in the 67th primary several years ago. The dems crossed in numbers to vote for the very weak conservative candidate (thanks to Cuccinelli and his vendetta against Reese). When we have weak conservative candidates, we lose. If it had not been for the moderate Republicans, Cuccinelli would not have those 92 winning votes. He owes us big time!!

  • James Young says:

    Awwww, fellow “moderates” jump to the Old Whithered Wench’s defense. So touching. She gets to belittle without criticism, but when someone responds in kind, he gets … more criticism. Yet another example of the self-serving double-standard which passes for discussion here. The funny thing is, I rarely, if ever, speak of her until she first attacks me (as she did here). I would suggest that you consider that fact, but I’d first have to assume that you care about facts.

    As for where you come from, “Clean it up,” where is that, exactly? The rocks under which you hide? Sure. Tell us another. I note that you refer to a “female,” not a “lady.” Good word choice. However, please do not engage in the logical fallacy of going from the specific to the general. My contempt for the specific “female” at issue certainly does not translate into “anger/violence tendencies toward females” in general.

    As for her comments, I doubt that anyone has actually “request[ed] a copy.” To the contrary, so many people share that opinion (I heard that assessment elsewhere before I had reason to share it) that her “file” must be large, indeed.

    “Common Idiot,” I compliment you on the propriety of your moniker. Of course I list this blog as I do. Isn’t it funny that you criticize me for doing so when it engages in broadsides against GOP nominees?

    And “Loudmouthed Inciter,” take your best shot, cupcake. I tremble in fear … NOT! After all, to do so, you’d have to shed your cloak of anonymity/pseudonymity. God forbid you should ever do that.

  • Jimmy sure is an angry guy.

  • James Young says:

    edmundburkenator sure is a cowardly guy.

  • 10 feet tall and Bulletproof says:

    You should tremble when thinking about LI…jimmy boi…. she’s bigger than you are.
    Sanity…I still believe in GWB. The only time he has ever upset me was when he was pushing amnesty for illegals. That fired me up. I’ve heard I wasn’t alone, either.

  • AWCheney says:

    Not only angry Edmund, but Jimmy’s childish rants are legend. I have seldom encountered ANYONE who was quite as eager as he to make a complete fool of himself on a public forum, in writing no less. Either he is the complete idiot that he believes everyone else to be (what an ego), or he has some really serious self-control issues…or both. Fact is, anyone that can’t participate in a bit of repartee without resorting to profanity and serious name-calling could well have both problems.

    BTW, this is the reason that I consider the diminutive of his name to be so very appropriate.

  • Common Idiot says:

    Jimmy — calling someone cowardly from the protection of your keyboardt — ooooh, what a tough guy.

    Now, don’t go away mad, Jimmy. Just go away.

  • Common Idiot says:

    BVBL is reporting that the Republican pledge is “dead” as a result of a vote at the Advance. Any info on that? Just what does that mean for the local pledge?

  • James Young says:

    You know, Old Whithered Wench, I wonder what is more childish: my behavior, or the attacks you persist on launching against me? If I were as irrelevant as you wish my to be, you wouldn’t bother. So grow up, or go away, you old bitch. The MOST relevance you could demonstate was getting an old, past-his-time incumbent reelected against an young, unseasoned newcomer by using sleazy tactics which you tried to dney. What a GREAT accomplishment. The best your friends here can to is hide behind “the protection of [their] keyboards,” and make elaborate accusations when someone dares to demonstrate that these Internet “emperors” have no clothes. The most you people can do is (sometimes) help defeat Republican candidates you loathe. You lack the courage to do so openly because your activities would be anathema to your participation as Republicans, were they to be known.

    You’re just so … “angry,” to borrow a word, than someone dares to recognize you for what you are, and cite chapter and verse of your sleazy activities.

  • “So grow up, or go away, you old bitch.”

    -James “The A-Hole” Young

    Who else here would like to kick Jimmy’s ass for his foul mouth towards a perfectly nice woman? What a complete ass.

    I asked around for you at the Advance, James, just so I could tell you this to your face. I guess you weren’t around, or you’re not as well known as you think you are.

  • rtwng extrmst says:

    NOVA Scout,

    “My objection is to the mentality that views the Party process as something that is best very closely held and kept away from the general electorate. This to me is a frightened, desperation-laced political outlook. It also bespeaks (and projects to people whose votes we need in the general election) a defeatist politics of decline.”

    NOVA I couldn’t disagree more. The reason for the pledge is so that people of honor will not cheapen the process by not allowing the Party to select its own candidate. I for one believe that these minor steps and ultimately registration by Party should improve and strengthen the Party. If nothing else taking these steps shed light on the problem and perhaps will get politicians to do something more about it.

    Perhaps if people are not happy with candidates when pledges or Party registration is in place it will get them off their duffs and involved in the Party process itself thus making a more informed electorate and more representative selection process. Even moreso if the Parties available do not represent their views and they can’t seem to get the Party to move in their direction, they can form their own Party and get their own candidates.

    “the whole thing just makes us look stupid. Not an endearing trait when trying to sell Republican candidates to the citizenry at large.”

    Most people don’t even know about the pledges because they don’t partake in Party processes (the problem I refer to above). Activists on both sides do, which is why some liberal activists try to make fun of this. In the end I believe Party registration is the answer and it will provide impetus for more involvement not less.

  • AWCheney says:

    The fact is, Jimmy, I bother because it is so much fun. You are SOOO predictable and I just love watching you make a complete fool of yourself.

  • rtwng extrmst says:

    Dorothy,

    Show me where Ken Cuccinelli had anything significant to do with the primary or election of the 67th in 2005. I seem to remember he pretty much stayed out of it. One thing for sure, had he actually hand-picked a candidate to oppose Reese I’d bet he would have not only beat Reese, but Kaput-O as well.

    As for Reese, had he been the real candidate of the Republican Party when he first ran in 2003, he would have been able to garner more than 40% of the vote. In both his primary races he could not obtain a majority. He did not share the beliefs of the party and thus he was not the candidate.

    What I find more interesting was the Primary in the 67th in 2003. Just why were there two conservatives in that race splitting the vote and allowing Reese in in the first place? Perhaps one of them was the real problem.

    I will agree that if we are going to primary someone we need to make sure we have a good candidate. In fact Cuccinelli is a great example of this. More people like him as candidates and we might just be able to turn back that Democrat tide.

    Finally, Ken owes every single persone that voted for him, not just the moderates. He particularly owes all those people who worked hard for his election and poured their own personal time and effort into it. He owes it to them to stick to his principles and serve as he has so far, which is why he was re-elected in the first place.

  • I guess Jimmy and I won’t be sharing an egg nog this holiday season.

    And rtwng extrmst, can’t you see this thread has spiraled into a Jimmy-bitch-o-rama-fest?

    I have the over on how many times he’ll use the “b” word by thread’s end. It’s even money on if he uses “wench” again and I’m giving 2 to anyone who knows what a brickbat is. No fair Googling.

  • David says:

    But why can’t Jimmy spell?

  • Robert Godwin says:

    The Advance had good moments and I am glad I went.
    I noticed the following:
    1) Gilmore will be our nominee for Senate and we must disregard his Richmond-centric arrogance and support him. He would be a far better Senator than Mark Warner. Let us not forget he carried Loudoun over Beyer by many percentage points in 1997.
    2) Saxman is great. He should run for Lt. Gov. unless Connaughton tees it up again. I now am for McCain partially because of Saxman’s endorsement.
    3) While we shouldn’t talk about this yet, McDonnell is the guy for 2009. While “Snacks” Bolling is a good and kindly man, we has little curb appeal outside of his Richmond base. He is pretty clueless in Loudoun also having one described Suzanne Volpe as “Loudoun’s Most Valuable Republican”.
    4) If Davis does not run for the 11th, we lose the seat to a horrible liberal Dem.Take your pick: the developer-financed Connelly or the “Hillary of Virginia” Leslie Byrne. RPV needs to support Davis and mend the fence. We need him to run two more times and focus on Wackjob Webb in 2012.
    5) Best of all, I sense a new warm, inclusionary wind that will bring new leadership into the LCRC and inspire disaffected former members to come back. This new leadership will be forged by the best elements of prior LCRC administrations with some Mims-Minchew aspects and some Volpe-Protic aspects. A strong aircraft always has two wings. It will welcome back managed growth enthusiasts/Teddy Roosevelt environmentalists, with defenders of the unborn, fiscal conservatives, and pragmatic Loudoun Republican business leaders who have been MIA for two years.

    I apologize for sounding like Isiah, but it is Advent.

    2008 could be a great year for Loudoun Republicans.

  • Robert, if you check back in here, please add those comments to the Advance thread at the top of the page. They are worth reading for others looking for Advance info and they’ll find it much easier there.

  • Philip Thomas says:

    Great comments by Robert.

    LI, if he does not repost his comment, please transfer it over and link to it.

    Interesting description of the “Mims-Minchew” and the “Volpe-Protic” aspects of LCRC leadership. I had never thought about this, but it makes sense.

  • I know of who he speaks but won’t let it out until he’s officially in. It is indeed a great choice that could bridge the gap.

  • Jose Kinusee says:

    LI,

    I like what the Godwin guy has to say. . .maybe he should be our chair? However, just a slight correction to his analogy–a bi-plane has two wings all other have one wing of which supports the fuselage at the center. We get his point though.

Leave Comment